Character Strength-Based Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy Focusing on Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Patients with Distress: A Randomized Control Trial of Positive Psychology

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Yi Zhou, Yinglong Duan, Jian Zhou, Ning Qin, Xiangyu Liu, Yue Kang, Ziyu Wan, Xing Zhou, Yuxuan Li, Juan Luo, Jianfei Xie, Andy SK Cheng
{"title":"Character Strength-Based Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy Focusing on Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Patients with Distress: A Randomized Control Trial of Positive Psychology","authors":"Yi Zhou, Yinglong Duan, Jian Zhou, Ning Qin, Xiangyu Liu, Yue Kang, Ziyu Wan, Xing Zhou, Yuxuan Li, Juan Luo, Jianfei Xie, Andy SK Cheng","doi":"10.1007/s10902-024-00795-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Positive psychological therapy has been found to be effective in psychological health in the broader cancer patient population. However, specific evidence regarding its effectiveness for adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients remains limited. More research is needed to determine the optimal approaches for alleviating distress in this particular group. We evaluated the efficacy of character strength-based cognitive-behavioral therapy (CS-CBT) versus cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for distress in AYA patients with cancer. In a randomized controlled three-arm trial, cancer patients aged 15-39 years were assigned to one of three groups using a random number table to ensure equal group sizes: (1) CS-CBT, which incorporated specific exercises focused on identifying and utilizing character strengths within the CBT framework; (2) CBT; or (3) control group. The primary outcome was improvement in patients’ overall mental health on the Distress Thermometer and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale 3 months after assignment to the groups. Analyses used generalized estimating equations. A total of 162 AYAs were randomly and equally assigned to three groups. Improvements in primary outcomes were significantly greater after CS-CBT than after CBT, and no significant differences were found between the CBT and control group. Among all primary and secondary outcomes, the only non-significant difference found was in quality of life with CS-CBT compared to CBT. AYA cancer patients rated their overall mental health and sense of thriving as more improved after CS-CBT than after CBT. However, quality-of-life indicators supported equal intervention effects in both groups. These findings support the effectiveness of the use of CS-CBT intervention in reducing distress and improving thriving.</p>","PeriodicalId":15837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Happiness Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Happiness Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-024-00795-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Positive psychological therapy has been found to be effective in psychological health in the broader cancer patient population. However, specific evidence regarding its effectiveness for adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients remains limited. More research is needed to determine the optimal approaches for alleviating distress in this particular group. We evaluated the efficacy of character strength-based cognitive-behavioral therapy (CS-CBT) versus cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for distress in AYA patients with cancer. In a randomized controlled three-arm trial, cancer patients aged 15-39 years were assigned to one of three groups using a random number table to ensure equal group sizes: (1) CS-CBT, which incorporated specific exercises focused on identifying and utilizing character strengths within the CBT framework; (2) CBT; or (3) control group. The primary outcome was improvement in patients’ overall mental health on the Distress Thermometer and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale 3 months after assignment to the groups. Analyses used generalized estimating equations. A total of 162 AYAs were randomly and equally assigned to three groups. Improvements in primary outcomes were significantly greater after CS-CBT than after CBT, and no significant differences were found between the CBT and control group. Among all primary and secondary outcomes, the only non-significant difference found was in quality of life with CS-CBT compared to CBT. AYA cancer patients rated their overall mental health and sense of thriving as more improved after CS-CBT than after CBT. However, quality-of-life indicators supported equal intervention effects in both groups. These findings support the effectiveness of the use of CS-CBT intervention in reducing distress and improving thriving.

Abstract Image

以性格力量为基础的认知行为疗法,关注青少年癌症患者:积极心理学随机对照试验
研究发现,积极心理疗法对广大癌症患者的心理健康有效。然而,有关积极心理疗法对青少年和年轻成人(AYA)癌症患者有效性的具体证据仍然有限。我们需要更多的研究来确定缓解这一特殊群体痛苦的最佳方法。我们评估了基于性格力量的认知行为疗法(CS-CBT)与认知行为疗法(CBT)对青少年癌症患者的困扰的疗效。在一项随机对照的三臂试验中,年龄在 15-39 岁的癌症患者被分配到三组中的一组,采用随机数字表以确保小组人数相等:(1) CS-CBT,该疗法包含特定练习,侧重于在 CBT 框架内识别和利用性格优势;(2) CBT;或 (3) 对照组。主要研究结果是患者在被分配到各组 3 个月后,在压力温度计(Distress Thermometer)和医院焦虑抑郁量表(Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale)上的总体心理健康状况的改善情况。分析采用了广义估计方程。共有162名青少年患者被随机平均分配到三个组别。CS-CBT治疗后,主要结果的改善程度明显高于CBT治疗后,CBT治疗组与对照组之间无明显差异。在所有主要和次要结果中,唯一没有发现显著差异的是 CS-CBT 与 CBT 相比对生活质量的改善。与 CBT 相比,亚青癌症患者在 CS-CBT 治疗后对其整体心理健康和幸福感的评价有了更大的改善。不过,生活质量指标支持两组干预效果相同。这些研究结果支持使用 CS-CBT 干预疗法在减少痛苦和提高幸福感方面的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
6.50%
发文量
110
期刊介绍: The international peer-reviewed Journal of Happiness Studies is devoted to theoretical and applied advancements in all areas of well-being research. It covers topics referring to both the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives characterizing well-being studies. The former includes the investigation of cognitive dimensions such as satisfaction with life, and positive affect and emotions. The latter includes the study of constructs and processes related to optimal psychological functioning, such as meaning and purpose in life, character strengths, personal growth, resilience, optimism, hope, and self-determination. In addition to contributions on appraisal of life-as-a-whole, the journal accepts papers investigating these topics in relation to specific domains, such as family, education, physical and mental health, and work. The journal welcomes high-quality theoretical and empirical submissions in the fields of economics, psychology and sociology, as well as contributions from researchers in the domains of education, medicine, philosophy and other related fields. The Journal of Happiness Studies provides a forum for three main areas in happiness research: 1) theoretical conceptualizations of well-being, happiness and the good life; 2) empirical investigation of well-being and happiness in different populations, contexts and cultures; 3) methodological advancements and development of new assessment instruments. The journal addresses the conceptualization, operationalization and measurement of happiness and well-being dimensions, as well as the individual, socio-economic and cultural factors that may interact with them as determinants or outcomes. Central Questions include, but are not limited to: Conceptualization: What meanings are denoted by terms like happiness and well-being? How do these fit in with broader conceptions of the good life? Operationalization and Measurement: Which methods can be used to assess how people feel about life? How to operationalize a new construct or an understudied dimension in the well-being domain? What are the best measures for investigating specific well-being related constructs and dimensions? Prevalence and causality Do individuals belonging to different populations and cultures vary in their well-being ratings? How does individual well-being relate to social and economic phenomena (characteristics, circumstances, behavior, events, and policies)? What are the personal, social and economic determinants and causes of individual well-being dimensions? Evaluation: What are the consequences of well-being for individual development and socio-economic progress? Are individual happiness and well-being worthwhile goals for governments and policy makers? Does well-being represent a useful parameter to orient planning in physical and mental healthcare, and in public health? Interdisciplinary studies: How has the study of happiness developed within and across disciplines? Can we link philosophical thought and empirical research? What are the biological correlates of well-being dimensions?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信